Rerum Novarum: 02/09/2020

On Papal Claims of Magisterial Authority:
(Musing of your humble servant at Rerum Novarum)

Disclaimer: The material presented below was originally written as part of a longer project but excised due to the project running overlong. It is presented here in a revised form with a few small additions.

The papacy underwent a development in its earliest years; however, there are clues to be had as to how the popes conceived of their magisterial authority from the earliest days. Without further ado, we start with the late first century and Pope Clement I who in his Epistle to the Corinthians admonished the rebellious Corinthians as follows:

[Y]e therefore, who laid the foundation of this sedition, submit yourselves to the presbyters, and receive correction so as to repent, bending the knees of your hearts. Learn to be subject, laying aside the proud and arrogant self-confidence of your tongue.{1}

The Anglican church historian Dr. T. G. Jalland explained the significance of this intervention as follows:

If it is true to say of the Roman intervention that ‘the authority is implicit, it being left to subsequent generations to make explicit the reasons which prompted an instinctive action’ (Lowell Clark, First Epistle of Clement pg. 20), we are still left with the question as to the source from which the instinct itself was derived. Instincts are usually traceable to habits of past generations. Was the source in this case merely the habituation of the Roman people to the government of others: or was it not rather, as the whole tone of the epistle would suggest, some custom which could claim a sanction apostolic or even Dominical in origen?{2}

From the late first century, we move into the late second century and a controversy surrounding the celebration of the feast of Easter. The Lutheran church historian Dr. Adolph Harnack explained what happened in the following way:

[Victor] ventured by an edict (one might say a pre-emptory edict) with reference to the arrangement of ecclesiastical feasts to proclaim the rule of the Roman practice as a general rule of the Church and to announce that any local church would be excluded as heretical from the fellowship of the one Church, if it did not adopt the Roman arrangement. How could Victor have ventured upon such an edict (still less to put it into actual effect, even if he had the strength to do so) unless it was established and recognized that in the decisive question of faith it was eminently the function of the Roman church to determine the conditions of the "common unity"? How could Victor have made such an unheard-of demand to the independent local churches, unless, as Bishop of Rome, he had been recognized as the guardian of the "common unity."{3}

Moving to the third century, we find arguably the first example of the Roman Pontiff making an explicit reference to the power of the keys to modify a significant part of church discipline.{4} Dr. Adolph Harnack explained the situation as follows:

Callistus was the first who emphasized the consequences [of the supposition that Paul and Peter founded the church at Rome]. If Tertullian names him scornfully ‘pontifex maximus’, ‘episcopus episcoporum’, ‘benedictus papa’, and ‘apostolicus’, these [appellations] are so many allusions to the fact that Callistus has already claimed a primacy for himself, or rather that he has annexed to his person as bishop the primacy which the Roman church possessed…From the motivation, in so far as Callistus appealed (for the first time in history) to Matt. xvi. 18ff to justify his action; and from Tertullian’s opposition, for Tertullian treats this edict not as directed locally to Rome, but one which is pregnant with consequences for all of Christendom.{5}

It was only a matter of time before a pope would come about who would tie together and embody explicitly everything that was implied in the increasingly regular claims of the popes.{6} This happened in the fifth century with Pope St. Leo the Great:

Leo is credited with asserting the authority and primacy of the successor to St. Peter in all Church matters, even enlisting the help of the current Roman emperor, Valentinian III, who issued an edict to the bishop in Gaul mandating “that nothing should be done in Gaul contrary to ancient usage, without the authority of the bishop of Rome, and that the decree of the apostolic see should henceforth be law.” When St. Leo’s position on Christ’s natures prevailed at the Council of Chalcedon, it helped launch the papacy into the position of dominance it has enjoyed ever since.{7}

From that point, it was a small step towards a sixth century pope settling a church schism by basically ordering eastern churches as a condition for his communion the swearing of a Profession of Faith containing the following explicit formulation:

The first means of safety is to guard the rule of strict faith and to deviate in no way from those things that have been laid down by the Fathers. And indeed the words of Our Lord Jesus Christ: "Thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church" cannot be disregarded; these things which were spoken are demonstrated by the results, for the Catholic religion has been preserved ever immaculate in the Apostolic See.{8}

And of course we have Pope St. Agatho I in a later controversy explaining his view of the papal primacy in these words to Emperor Constantine IV:

I beseech you with a contrite heart and rivers of tears, with prostrated mind, deign to stretch forth your most clement right hand to the Apostolic doctrine which the co-worker of your pious labours, the blessed apostle Peter, has delivered, that it be not hidden under a bushel, but that it be preached in the whole earth more shrilly than a bugle: because the true confession thereof for which Peter was pronounced blessed by the Lord of all things, was revealed by the Father of heaven, for he received from the Redeemer of all himself, by three commendations, the duty of feeding the spiritual sheep of the Church; under whose protecting shield, this Apostolic Church of his has never turned away from the path of truth in any direction of error, whose authority, as that of the Prince of all the Apostles, the whole Catholic Church, and the Ecumenical Synods have faithfully embraced, and followed in all things; and all the venerable Fathers have embraced its Apostolic doctrine, through which they as the most approved luminaries of the Church of Christ have shone; and the holy orthodox doctors have venerated and followed it, while the heretics have pursued it with false criminations and with derogatory hatred.{9}

It is not hard from that point to make the trajectory to a pope flat out claiming that not only is the Apostolic See the highest authority but that no one could judge the pope but God.{10} As one can readily see, the view of the popes of their Apostolic prerogatives is quite clear. It just so happens that a similar understanding was also shared by the early and later ecumenical councils as well.

Notes:

{1} Pope St. Clement I: From His Epistle to the Corinthians (circa 96 AD) as Quoted in the Rerum Novarum Post More on Popes, Heresy, Theology, Church History, Etc. (circa February 11, 2019)

{2} Dr. T. G. Jalland: From His Work The Church and the Papacy (c. 1944) As Cited in B.C. Butler’s The Church and Infallibility pgs. 129-30 (c. 1954) Quoted From the Writing The Ante-Nicene Development of Papal Primacy (circa February 2, 2002) extracted from material originally published on February 21, 2001.

{3} Dr. Adolph Harnack: From His Work Dogmengeschichte, 4^th ed., pp. 489f (c. 1904) As Cited in B.C. Butler’s The Church and Infallibility pg. 140 (c. 1954) Quoted From the Writing The Ante-Nicene Development of Papal Primacy (circa February 2, 2002) extracted from material originally published on February 21, 2001.

{4} Arguably what Pope St. Callistus I did in 220 AD or thereabout is a far more significant alteration of presumably inalterable tradition than what Pope Francis did with Amoris Laetitia in the controversial Chapter Eight.

{5} Dr. Adolph Harnack: From His Work Dogmengeschichte, 4^th ed., pp. 492 (c. 1904) As Cited in B.C. Butler’s The Church and Infallibility pg. 140 (c. 1954) Quoted From the Writing The Ante-Nicene Development of Papal Primacy (circa February 2, 2002) extracted from material originally published on February 21, 2001.

{6} The "increasingly regular claims of the popes" to which I refer here is to a particular primacy of authority in the Church.

{7} Stephen Beale: Excerpt From His Catholic Exchange Article Why Pope Leo Was Great (circa November 13, 2012)

{8} Pope St. Hormisdas I: Excerpt From His Formulary of Hormisdas (circa 517 AD) as Quoted in the Rerum Novarum Post More on Popes, Heresy, Theology, Church History, Etc. (circa February 11, 2019)

{9} Pope St. Agatho I: Excerpt From His Letter to Pope Constantine IV (circa 681 AD) as Quoted in the Rerum Novarum Post More on Popes, Heresy, Theology, Church History, Etc. (circa February 11, 2019)

{10} "The sentence of the Apostolic See (than which there is no higher authority) is not subject to revision by anyone, nor may anyone lawfully pass judgment thereupon." [Pope St. Nicholas I: From His Letter to Emperor Michael (circa 865 AD) as Paraphrased by the First Vatican Council Dogmatic Constitution Pastor Aeternus (circa July 18, 1870)]

Rerum Novarum

Saturday, February 15, 2020

Friday, February 14, 2020

Wednesday, February 12, 2020

Tuesday, February 11, 2020

Blog Archive

Pages